A Minute for Parents

Summary

Teaching Children to Evaluate What is True

Article

By JoAnn Hibbert Hamilton

We need to teach children/teens to evaluate what is true. There was a time when documentaries were honest-to-goodness documentaries, according to Paul Asay (“The Inconvenient Truth about Documentaries,” Focus on the family, Plugged/N, p. 16). We assumed in the past that documentaries would be fair, reasonable and dispassionate. That is no longer true. Now we need to understand and teach our children accordingly that documentaries, whether they are seen in school, on television or elsewhere, are often advocating some issue.

The mistake adults, children and teens are making in today’s world is accepting these documentaries as objective journalism. Asay says many documentaries are more like issues-based reality shows. He says, “Sometimes they tell compelling, important stories. Still, they have a point of view that, left unaccounted for, can also twist and mislead viewers. . . especially our kids.”

Asay gives parents a few tricks of the trade to help children evaluate what is true. Here are his ideas:

Interviews – “Cast a critical eye on both the questions and the people being interviewed. Are the questions fair? Are the interviewees qualified experts?” Do they all present only one side of the issue? Is a person being peppered with inappropriate questions? An example of this that Asay uses is Bill Maher’s new film Religuous, which he says is more a tantrum against religion rather than a serious documentary. Maher avoided interviewing any prominent clergy, scholars or apologists, concentrating only on laymen who felt as he did.

I understand this because I have experienced good use and abuse in interviews and of necessity learned how to handle the abuse. I know it is a very real occurrence. One time I sat for an hour and twenty minutes behind a television camera while the interviewer tried his best to have me make some inappropriate statement. Because I knew what he was doing, I just didn’t go there.

Editing – “A documentary’s power is enhanced during the editing process. Subjects can come off smelling like a rose or stinking . . . and audiences have no idea what was left out.” Did the editor include an interviewee’s best bits or worst? “Did the original discussion last ten minutes or an hour? Are the remarks in context?” Was a pause spliced in for effect? (Ibid.) Were the comments twisted so they expressed an opposite view? Sometimes it is difficult to know, but a critical viewer needs to evaluate just how much to believe.

Video clips – These can be used to imply information. For instance when a Bible-based cartoon is used, there can be an implication that the stories are childish, and when video clips of extreme violence are shown to support verses pulled out of the Bible and Koran, the inference is again pretty clear. Asay says, “Images are powerful teachers. Notice what they are teaching.”

The facts – Documentaries use statistics to support their premise. “But stats can mislead, and many documentaries cherry-pick their facts,” according to Asay. He used this example in his article: “When Morgan Spurlock gained nearly 25 pounds eating a month’s worth of McDonald’s food in Super Size Me, several scholars tried to replicate Spurlock’s work. None were able to do so. One study reported that its participants lost weight.”

So how do we defend our self? Asay suggests well-rounded knowledge. He says, “Ask questions. What are these films trying to tell me? Are they objective? Research the topics with your teen. Keep an eye on a film’s persuasive techniques, and refuse to be swayed by a filmmaker’s passion. . . . Think for yourself, and teach children to do the same.”

Then expand critical thinking to the television news, commentaries and newspapers. This could be a wonderful experience with your teens.